How Much Power Is Possible

[iamjackiechan 0]

hi

im running an s16 on carbs and have done a few things to it, its got 175bhp but i feel like i want more power.

 

is anyone else running there engine on carbs with higher bhp.

 

i have thought about swapping the carbs for a turbo but i know i will miss the sound.

 

anyone got any advice

 

will

[SurGie 54]

Throttle bodies, better HP/torque and has the same sound with less problems associated with carbs..

[iamjackiechan 0]

i thought about throttle bodies but i cant see the slight extra hp being worth the money.

 

in regards to the less problems than carbs, ive now done 2000 miles without one single problem from my carbs, it starts first time everytime and pulls like a train

[Baz 421]

Throttle bodies, better HP/torque and has the same sound with less problems associated with carbs..

 

 

What makes you think TB's give any more power than well set-up carbs, and what problems do carbs have then?

 

Enlighten me.

Edited November 20, 2009 by Baz

[bales 1]

Does this win an award for most vague thread of the year!

 

hi

im running an s16 on carbs and have done a few things to it, its got 175bhp but i feel like i want more power.

 

Well tune it some more then....

 

is anyone else running there engine on carbs with higher bhp.

 

Yes

 

i have thought about swapping the carbs for a turbo but i know i will miss the sound.

 

Yes you will, but I think you would get better results attaching the turbo to the exhaust manifold rather than the inlet.

 

anyone got any advice

 

Wear sunscreen, and stay out of the sun in the hottest part of the day.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

sorry

[Galifrey 1]

Throttle bodies, better HP/torque and has the same sound with less problems associated with carbs..

 

ORLY? Please elaborate?

[Ludi 2 2 Cars]

Wear sunscreen, and stay out of the sun in the hottest part of the day.

 

 

 

[Batfink 201]

stick a set of camshafts in and you will be happier.

[danpug 1]

From what i've seen posted on here throttle bodies do tend to edge carbs on power.

[Galifrey 1]

From what i've seen posted on here throttle bodies do tend to edge carbs on power.

 

It is edge tho, not a massive increase to allow for the costs compared to replacing the stock induction.

 

Spend the money on a petert camshaft

 

Edited November 20, 2009 by Galifrey

[weejimmy 1]

Does this win an award for most vague thread of the year!

 

sorry

 

 

no it dosent as its qutie obvious exactly what hese asking.

he has a s16 on carbs, he has around 175 bhp, he would like more power so has asked if anyone with a similar set up has got more power and asking for advice on how to do this or if he should look at other optoins.

 

why do people on here go out there way to try slag off other peoples threads.

i can understand why when a newbie comes on and asks "hw da i trbo ma motar ta git mare pwr fi it m8" and stuff.

but just think people on this forum are slowy geting a bit big for there boots and trying to shoot other peole down. (not you specificly bales, just took this one to make me reply)

[jackherer 543]

Yes you will, but I think you would get better results attaching the turbo to the exhaust manifold rather than the inlet.

 

Really? I've always connected them to both

[Batfink 201]

I think if you are getting 175bhp on the carbs then you have got a well set up car. I never made more than that on my mi16 on throttlebodies.

camshafts and higher compression are the next logical steps.

[Anthony 1,003]

Are you still running standard cams? Something like a Petert Stage 1 or 2 regrind seems the most obvious route in terms of bang for buck.

[bales 1]

Wow one slightly sarcastic post which wasn't even particularly harsh and (I thought pretty tongue in cheek) and I get jumped on.

 

I'm not exactly a prolific poster or one who posts like that regular basis like some people do, jeez it was a bit of a joke. I'll remember to be completely serious next time.

 

Really? I've always connected them to both

 

Thanks, it wasn't 100% a serious comment though was it.

[welshpug 1,657]

have a look at PVFCpug's 205's spec, stock head and a well put together bottom end with a set of cams carbs and a dry sump, 200 + bhp.

[Galifrey 1]

why do people on here go out there way to try slag off other peoples threads.

i can understand why when a newbie comes on and asks "hw da i trbo ma motar ta git mare pwr fi it m8" and stuff.

but just think people on this forum are slowy geting a bit big for there boots and trying to shoot other peole down. (not you specificly bales, just took this one to make me reply)

 

I do agree, I think bales was being tongue in cheek tho.

 

I do tend to respond in a sarcastic tone when something quite obviously bad advice is posted.

 

ie. Replace carbs with £1500 worth of throttle bodies and management and you will get loads more HP and Torque and less problems.

 

Mei hit the nail on the head with his post about PVFCpugs car, carbs are EXTEMELY capable of delivering VERY good results for a very good price. Sure they wont be as economical, and I wouldn't want to use them with a catalyst, sure ITB's will give more accurate fueling in some cases (ie well setup and mapped, closed loop etc) but they aren't a massive improvement in performance over carbs for the expense. If the choice is carbs or ITBs from stock induction, then of course cost is less of a difference.

[bales 1]

As Galifrey says above I think cost is the main issue with carbs.

 

Of course tb's are the optimum solution all round but when you are looking at £1000+ for something that will only affect the driveability and fuel economy I don't think it is worth it on this type of car, especially when in outright foot to the floor performance there will be very little difference.

 

Me and my dad used to have a MG Midget that was pretty highly tuned and gave out about 110bhp, that was on a weber 45 and was set up properly by a guy who was one of the old school of tuners - everything was by ear and by feel. It would pull from low revs to the redline without a cough or a splutter anywhere across the rev-range, its just that there are less and less people these days who have the necessary skills or want to spend the amount of time doing this when you can get generic remaps for most things these days by plugging a laptop in!

[Masekwm 2]

Are you still running standard cams? Something like a Petert Stage 1 or 2 regrind seems the most obvious route in terms of bang for buck.

 

Does anyone know how much Peter charges? I can't see anything on his website about pricing.

[Anthony 1,003]

Does anyone know how much Peter charges? I can't see anything on his website about pricing.

I'm sure he'll reply as and when he sees this, but from memory it's around $220AUD including return shipping (around £125 thanks to the weak pound at the moment). Postage for the cam over to Austrailia is around £10 or so.

[Masekwm 2]

Is it wrong for a Bride to buy her Groom a camshaft?

[iamjackiechan 0]

il be honest, bales that was a bellend reply and not really called for as everyone else seemed to understand where i was coming from.

 

and thank you weejimmy for hitting the nail directly on the head for people going out there way for no apparent reason.

 

not directed at bales, but too many people think they know to much and therefore dont think they should be seriouse when it comes to people that are trying to gain some of there klnowledge.

isnt the whole point in the forum for sharing experience, knowlegde and helping each other out.

 

yes my initial post may have been a little vague and i do apologise.

 

the only other thing done to the engine is a stage 2 petert inlet cam which would explain the reasonable increase in power over the standard engine, but do you think i will see another significant increase in power if i replaced the exhaust cam aswell.

 

200bhp would be ideal for what im looking for.

 

i could go down the big valve etc route but that becomes very costly

[GLPoomobile 958]

I really, really don't want to derail the topic any further, so I apologise up front for this, but...

 

When it comes to technical topics you really need to give all the information you possibly can if you expect to get any sort of useful reply. To IAJC (whom I always thought was called Jamjackiechan until now ), you obviously can see the point as you've acknowledged your post was a bit vague. I think in general there are some of us who (possibly exasperated by the inlux of new members) have exceeded our tolerance threshold recently and have been a little harsh in reply to some questions. It's not meant to be nasty, but I think we all need to adopt the "help us to help you" philosophy. I know not everyone likes to type a mass of text (like I do ), but really you can't always expect an answer to a question that is not properly asked. That's a general bit of advice for anyone reading this, it's not specifically aimed at you IAJC.

 

The only other thing I'd say on the subject as well (since I have no technical advice to offer), is it's another example of the way in which you title a topic can influence the kind of response you get to it. First inpressions and all that. Be more specific with the text allowance at hand. You could have titled it something like "How can I exceed 175bhp on my carbed Mi?". That's short and specific and I didn't even need to use the sub-title part

[bales 1]

il be honest, bales that was a bellend reply and not really called for as everyone else seemed to understand where i was coming from.

 

and thank you weejimmy for hitting the nail directly on the head for people going out there way for no apparent reason.

 

not directed at bales, but too many people think they know to much and therefore dont think they should be seriouse when it comes to people that are trying to gain some of there klnowledge.

isnt the whole point in the forum for sharing experience, knowlegde and helping each other out.

 

Nice of you to resort to name calling given that my post was hardly offensive was it, I didn't insult you and to be honest I was nowehere near as 'to the point' that GLP and Sarty can be at times!

 

The point is that you could literally spend hours and hours reading all the topics that would have information you wanted on specific subjects, there is so much information on this website that every single one of your 'questions' could have been answered with even the most basic search.

 

Doesn't the signing up procedure even say to search before asking a common question??

 

If you can't be arsed to research your subject matter and at least add a little bit of basic information in your post then why expect people to reciprocate it on a topic that has been answered literally 1000's of times!

 

Perhaps looking back my reply was a little harsh so apologies but I don't think it is the worst I have ever seen on here and I stand by my points above.

 

Anyway I'll shut up now and the thread can get back on topic.

[iamjackiechan 0]

thats a very valid point.

 

maybe i have worded the title wrong, i was wanting to find out how far people have taken setups similar to mine power wise. the way i see it from post people have put up, if you want some big power around 300 this is only achievable via forced induction.

 

or am i wrong