nib1980
|
| posted on 26/1/09 at 08:33 PM |
|
|
Hypothetically speaking
Hi All,
hypothetically speaking, if you were taking out a 1300 xflow to replace with a 1600 xflow, it would make sense.
Now what if while rebuilding the 1600 you found out it was a 1600 +0.030, and had a piper 285 cam. but then when taking the 1300 out you found it was
a 1300 +0.090, and you havent even taken the bottom end apart yet to see what it is.
What would you do?
fit the 1300 back after checkling the bottom end.
fit the 1600 in?
take the best both and build a monster?
this hypothetical person is very confused?
also this hypothetical person is planning on selling the other engine when finished....
|
|
|
|
|
clairetoo
|
| posted on 26/1/09 at 08:38 PM |
|
|
Put the 1300 +90's in the 1600 , along with the 285 cam , big valve the head , lighten the flywheel and top it off with throttle bodies and a
megasquirt 
Its cuz I is blond , innit
Claire xx
Will weld for food......
|
|
|
Paul TigerB6
|
| posted on 26/1/09 at 08:38 PM |
|
|
Fit a Zetec, or even better a bike engine and sell the x-flow engines to men in flat caps / crash helmets
|
|
|
omega0684
|
| posted on 26/1/09 at 08:40 PM |
|
|
ditch the x-flow and the zetec and stick in a cosworth turbo!
|
|
|
UncleFista
|
| posted on 26/1/09 at 08:42 PM |
|
|
I'd have the 1.6 bored for the 1.3 pistons 
Actually, we sold our knackered and smoking 1.6 xflow on ebay to a weirdy-beardy type who drove a round trip of over 300 miles to give us £200 for it
We bought a Zetec with most of the bits for RWD for £50 of the cash to replace it...
Tony Bond / UncleFista
Love is like a snowmobile, speeding across the frozen tundra.
Which suddenly flips, pinning you underneath.
At night the ice-weasels come...
|
|
|
nib1980
|
| posted on 26/1/09 at 08:43 PM |
|
|
I'm sticking with xflow for now thanks
any one else?
|
|
|
speedyxjs
|
| posted on 26/1/09 at 08:55 PM |
|
|
best of both. Make the most sense
How long can i resist the temptation to drop a V8 in?
|
|
|
MkII
|
| posted on 26/1/09 at 08:56 PM |
|
|
stick with it.
(crossflow--- its the future)
|
|
|
mark chandler
|
| posted on 26/1/09 at 09:02 PM |
|
|
No substitute for cubes, 1600.
Why else would you overbore a 1300 unless you were trying to grow it.
1300 flywheel may be lighter so have a wiegh up
|
|
|
smart51
|
| posted on 26/1/09 at 09:30 PM |
|
|
I'd be tempted to look into making a nice crossflow from the best of both. It is a light engine (for a ford) and can be tuned to 150 BHP
without much trouble. Sure, a zetec can be made up to 150 easily enough but if its heavier are you better off? Your crossflow will fit back into
your car without any changes needed.
Of course it might end up costing you a fair sum to make up the crossflow so you might be as well spending it on something better.
If you can fit all the good bits to your 1600 block you could make a nice little lump.
|
|
|
D Beddows
|
| posted on 26/1/09 at 09:41 PM |
|
|
As has been said, stick the 1300 pistons in the 1600 block - the 1300 sump might be a bit shallower than the 1600 which might be handy but the
flywheels will probably be the same weight (but obviously worth checking in case someone's put an 1100 one on which would be lighter). The con
rods will be the same (worth weighing them if you're taking it all apart to see if they've been balanced) but you wont be able to use the
1300 crank in the 1600.
Stick with it - I know it's SERIOUSLY unfashionable to suggest that a kit car with a free revving 100-120bhp engine is actually much more fun to
drive than one with 350 but......
|
|
|
MikeR
|
| posted on 26/1/09 at 09:46 PM |
|
|
Be aware the 1600 is 1" taller than the 1300 ..... wonder how they got the extra 300cc?
make the best of both worlds and have a 'proper' engine in your seven.
|
|
|
David Jenkins
|
| posted on 26/1/09 at 10:19 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by D Beddows
- the 1300 sump might be a bit shallower than the 1600 which might be handy
Unfortunately the 1600 crank will just clatter against the 1300 sump... don't ask how I know. 
quote:
Stick with it - I know it's SERIOUSLY unfashionable to suggest that a kit car with a free revving 100-120bhp engine is actually much more fun to
drive than one with 350 but......
Too true! My ~100BHP car will see off all chav-mobiles and more than a few sports cars, is pleasant to drive, and is utterly predictable on twisty
roads.
[Edited on 26/1/09 by David Jenkins]
|
|
|
trextr7monkey
|
| posted on 26/1/09 at 11:42 PM |
|
|
How about sell both existing engines either as a package for someone wishing to spend and tinker to produce one decent engine or to 2 separate
parties?
You could then use money + part of what you would be paying the engineering shop and for sundries and gaskets etc to buy a 1760 x flow or similar
from a westfield owner who is up grading to a more modern power plant. That way you get everything matched and ready to pop in on a wet Sunday
afternoon.
- it seems as if once theyhave a new engine the old one goes down in their esteem very quickly. You mightbe lucky!
http://www.flickr.com/photos/14016102@N00/ (cut and paste this dodgey link)
Our most recent pics are here:
http://s129.photobucket.com/albums/p211/trextr7monkey/
|
|
|
clairetoo
|
| posted on 27/1/09 at 06:43 AM |
|
|
quote:
Unfortunately the 1600 crank will just clatter against the 1300 sump... don't ask how I know.
Probably found out the same way I did
quote:
Too true! My ~100BHP car will see off all chav-mobiles and more than a few sports cars, is pleasant to drive, and is utterly predictable on twisty
roads.
Your not wrong there I only took my crossflow out because I fancied a change , and while the V6 sounds great , I do feel I've got more power
than I want
Its cuz I is blond , innit
Claire xx
Will weld for food......
|
|
|
nib1980
|
| posted on 27/1/09 at 08:32 AM |
|
|
excellant list of ideas, and I suspect all have been covered. I defo gonna have to have a good think about this now, as my little brain is
hurting.
any one else got any possible solutions?
|
|
|
iank
|
| posted on 27/1/09 at 12:06 PM |
|
|
1300 for lower road tax, and supercharge it.
See this months PPC.
--
Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level, then beat you with experience.
Anonymous
|
|
|
02GF74
|
| posted on 27/1/09 at 12:41 PM |
|
|
what is it exactly you want to do?
if you want to fit the 1300, then fit that.
if you want more bhp, then there is no substitute for cubes, hence you would fit the 1600.
you will pax more rad tax though.
if you want even more bhp, then you would look at modifying the 1600.
for example:
fitting 1300 pistonswill raise CR
fitting light flywheel
fitting larger valve head
fitting wilder camshaft
and so on.
now there is some misinformation in this post.
1. the 1600 engine is more like 30 mm taller than the 1300
2. the conrods for the 1600 are longer than the 1300 engine
|
|
|
MikeR
|
| posted on 27/1/09 at 12:55 PM |
|
|
Aww come on, I'm 5mm out - its not that much, honest
(I did think I'd written "about an inch" so apologies all round)
|
|
|
nib1980
|
| posted on 27/1/09 at 12:57 PM |
|
|
right here's my plan.
I'm gonna fit the 1600, and make sure it works then, rebuild the 1300 for someone else to use (got loads of spares)
just one more question.
does the Piper 285 cam require modified pistons? or are standards ok?
|
|
|
02GF74
|
| posted on 27/1/09 at 01:43 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by MikeR
Aww come on, I'm 5mm out - its not that much, honest
(I did think I'd written "about an inch" so apologies all round)
ok, I'll let you off. actually I think it is nearer to 35 mm but I ouwld need to measure.
If you look atthe engine specs, the stroke differs by about 25 mm (from memory) but the block is taller since longer con rods are used.
I did know the figures as I am in the throes of a 1300 -> 1600 conversion at some point although the weather and lower tax are holding me back. I
am also gonna struggle to fit the 1600 under the bonnet but I can drop the engine mounts - the lowest part of the engine is the gearbox housing
anyways.
|
|
|
D Beddows
|
| posted on 27/1/09 at 02:23 PM |
|
|
Realy? while I'm quite willing to admit my specialist subject is the 1300 crossflow I was always under the impression the longer 1600 stroke was
generated by a longer throw crank than the 1300 and it was the 1100 that came with longer conrods........ like I say, quite willing to admit I may be
wrong though
|
|
|
nib1980
|
| posted on 27/1/09 at 03:05 PM |
|
|
And any ideas if a 285 cam needs mods to pistons?
|
|
|
