Jump to content
  • Welcome to 205GTIDrivers.com!

    Hello dear visitor! Feel free to browse but we invite you to register completely free of charge in order to enjoy the full functionality of the website.

Sign in to follow this  
Guest Sammo

Mi16 Engine Differences?

Recommended Posts

Guest Sammo

Evening all.

 

I am going to look at a GTI tomorrow that has been converted to an Mi16. However it has the later 2.0 engine rather than the early 1.9. Is this engine as powerful? Does it suffer from any problems?

 

Cheers

 

Sammo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JRL

hi sammo, I belive that engine is later than the alloy block, heavier and a bit less powerful. I think the one to look out for is the d6c mi16 engine. I have not been in the 2litre engined 205 but Im guessing it will still be very quick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
petert

If done properly, the 2L Mi16 transplant is very good. There's only 5hp so difference, and probably zero without a cat., but the 2L is a much better base if you want upgrades later.

Edited by petert

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dcc

Although the iron block is a very good base engine, a few people prefer the way the lighter 1.9 responds. i didnt notice much of a difference in handling between the 2 weight differences, but always felt the 1.9 was more eager to rev.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DrSarty
but always felt the 1.9 was more eager to rev.

 

Don't want to open a can of worms here, but surely the 2.0L should be more eager as it's a square ratio (bore x stroke) 86x86mm rather than the 1.9's 83x88mm.

 

I don't disagree, but I think it's just a feeling rather than a fact.

 

Could be wrong though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
C_W

Could well be, it seems the engines do have different natures, probably more power spread in the 2.0 version and less peaky, and even sound different. The GTi6 engine always sounds "zingy" to me when I've heard them in car!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
James_m
Don't want to open a can of worms here, but surely the 2.0L should be more eager as it's a square ratio (bore x stroke) 86x86mm rather than the 1.9's 83x88mm.

 

I don't disagree, but I think it's just a feeling rather than a fact.

 

Could be wrong though.

 

Ive never driven 2.0 with a working acav so they are always revvy, but one reason it might feel less responsive is the throttle response feels flat on the 2.0's and not a patch on 1.9 in 8 or 16v guise, i do like them however.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jackherer

My mates got an S16 in his 205 with a 1.9 Mi inlet manifold and ECU/AFM etc so its quite easy to compare to a 1.9 from my point of view. It pulls harder throughout the rev range but more so at the low end so it feels proportionally less revvy. Throttle response and general driving feels very similar to a 1.9 which is unsurprising as its got the same TB and manangement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×