Embrace The Ew!

[welshpug 1,657]

hmm, so which EW10 would be the best/easiest variant to get into a 205? If both the 138 and 180 engines give similar results on throttle bodies then whichever comes to hand at a reasonable price?

[Sandy 191]

Basic EW10s are SO cheap now, I'd get that everytime. The 180 head is basically better as it comes, but I'd always prefer to start with the EW10 head for a ported one.

[Alan_M 66 1 Cars]

Without sounding Max Power-ish, what sort of power is ultimately achievable from a tweaked 138bhp EW10?

[dcc 855]

Depends completely on how deep your pockets are...

 

Either way, I am keen to find out

[Alan_M 66 1 Cars]

Depends completely on how deep your pockets are...

 

Either way, I am keen to find out

 

Considering I was planning on rebuilding a GTi6, mildly deep! But every time I come back to this thread, I change my mind and fancy shoving the EW10 I have into the 205 instead.

[Cameron 16]

Before we get carried away here with ideas of buying the basic EW10 engine.. Sandy would you care to divulge how much you would charge to do the necessary head work to get this making power comparable to or above the J4S?

 

It's all very well saying you'd buy the basic head if you have the knowledge, experience and ability(!) to modify it yourself, but unless the people in this thread also have the above (or at least very deep pockets) you're in danger of misdirecting people.

 

The EW10J4S is 180bhp out of the box, and I understand the head is already good to take on some minor power upgrades, so what cost would be involved in getting the 138bhp head / engine to this level?

[welshpug 1,657]

Bodies and a decent exhaust manifold takes the 138 to around the 190bhp/170lbft mark, not sure what the 180 makes but its not much more I believe.

[Cameron 16]

Would be interesting to see a proper comparison of both with equal minor modifications.. i.e. both with ITB's, ITB's and cams, ITB's cams and exhaust.

[DrSarty 90 1 Cars]

a proper comparison

 

Therein lies the difficulty!

 

Engines on same engine dyno, with comparitive/aligned spend and technical upgrades would not be easy to manage unless you were really lucky. It'll just take time.

 

Testing anywhere else, i.e. road, track or strip could be subjective based on other factors such as chassis, tyres, driver and even the application the engine/car was designed for etc.

 

I think it's probably safe to say - without fear of contradiction - that the EW is the better basis to build from. It's lighter, stiffer (as I read it), with more potential in the head, which I believe Guy Croft says is where the power lies.

 

The XU and TU are good, and as with all engines will have limitations. But perhaps it's time to admit that Peugeot/Citroen - with all of their millions of £££ - have developed the XU into the EW for sound reasons, and there is now a better platform for us all to use.

 

My point being, there's perhaps no need to dwell on XU vs EW, as you are perhaps already a few steps ahead with the EW as a basis so it's hard/impossible for the XU to catch up, as certain key improvements have already been designed in.

[Cameron 16]

Rich, welcome back btw! I appreciate the difficulty in getting proper comparisons between the engines, but we don't need that level of accuracy here, a back-to-back of the same engine on the same rollers before and after will do to show how responsive each one is to the modifications.

 

All I (and I'm sure anyone else reading this) want to see is that the 138bhp EW10 is capable of reaching the power output of the 180bhp version with only minor bolt-on mods, which is the impression I believe some posters were getting from Sandy's statement of chosing the 138 to tune. I, however, get the feeling Sandy chooses this one because it gives him more freedom to shape the ports to his requirements as naturally there will be more meat in them; this is why I'm posting questions here, as I don't believe the 138 will make equal power to a 180 with the same mods - I wait to be proved wrong though!

Edited May 15, 2012 by Cameron

[Toddy 7]

http://www.evo.co.uk/carreviews/evocarreviews/39687/peugeot_206_gti.html

 

This using cheaper ECU etc

[Liquid_106 97 1 Cars]

http://www.evo.co.uk...ot_206_gti.html

 

This using cheaper ECU etc

Like the idea, but what returns can you expect by chucking £3k+ at the EW RS? I'm guessing the RS would cost more on the initial outlay, but bang for buck should it still come out on top after the same work as the 'lesser' GTi?

[Batfink 201]

Rich, welcome back btw! I appreciate the difficulty in getting proper comparisons between the engines, but we don't need that level of accuracy here, a back-to-back of the same engine on the same rollers before and after will do to show how responsive each one is to the modifications.

 

All I (and I'm sure anyone else reading this) want to see is that the 138bhp EW10 is capable of reaching the power output of the 180bhp version with only minor bolt-on mods, which is the impression I believe some posters were getting from Sandy's statement of chosing the 138 to tune. I, however, get the feeling Sandy chooses this one because it gives him more freedom to shape the ports to his requirements as naturally there will be more meat in them; this is why I'm posting questions here, as I don't believe the 138 will make equal power to a 180 with the same mods - I wait to be proved wrong though!

 

As far as I am aware there is not that much different on the two engines. The exhaust is, and the VVT mechanism /management. Certainly if building a race engine VVT tends to get binned anyway. If the 180 head is basically a ported and bigger valved version of the standard design then the end result could be identicle.

[welshpug 1,657]

from post 1...

 

EW10J4 (140PS) 1997cc, 85mm bore and 88mm stroke, 45mm big ends, 212.5mm block height, 33mm inlet and 29mm exhaust, 28.4mm cam followers

 

EW10J4S (180PS) 1997cc, 85mm bore and 88mm stroke, 45mm big ends, 212.5mm block height, 35mm inlet and 31mm exhaust valves, 30mm cam followers, variable cam phasing control

 

Rods on the S are bushed and have different pistons.

 

Found some interesting pics here;

 

http://www.weekendracer.co.uk/viewthread.php?tid=21578&page=1

 

Edited May 15, 2012 by welshpug

[Cameron 16]

As far as I am aware there is not that much different on the two engines. The exhaust is, and the VVT mechanism /management. Certainly if building a race engine VVT tends to get binned anyway. If the 180 head is basically a ported and bigger valved version of the standard design then the end result could be identicle.

 

This is my point - while the initial outlay for a 4S engine may be higher, the cost of modifying a 138 head to the same level is far greater. If it were me, I'd pay the extra couple of hundred quid up front, the latter is proving to be false economy.

[Batfink 201]

If you were building an engine on the cheap then certainly. Depends if you want a good head out the box or one specific to your engine.

Certainly due to budget I am using a gti-6 head on my car instead of porting the XU7

[welshpug 1,657]

I think it depends very much on on what you want from it, a good 180 on a stock inlet, or 190 from the much cheaper 138 engine on bodies, and a very good base to supersede the 180 if you want to build something special later on.

 

I don't think there's that much in it if you had both on the same inlet and exhaust and cams, don't know if sandy has compared them in this much detail?

[Alan_M 66 1 Cars]

Just been browsing the 206info forum, and there are a few tuned 138s on there. The first has the works, bodies/cams/Longman head/exhaust and managed 213bhp (spent £6.5k though, think Ecosse did the work ). The second with just bodies/exhaust/180 bottom end on 203bhp. A few with just cams/management running about 160.

 

Whose the chap with the 205 180 S/Charged engine? I'm sure he had bodies beforehand. What power was that running at?

[welshpug 1,657]

he's on here and has a project thread

[Alan_M 66 1 Cars]

202bhp & 161ib.ft for cams, bodies and Omex on a 180 engine.

[stu8v 68 1 Cars]

I now have the bodies :-)

[welshpug 1,657]

202bhp & 161ib.ft for cams, bodies and Omex on a 180 engine.

 

not great then!

[Cameron 16]

I imagine the 180 is pretty highly tuned out of the box, so not too surprising that it struggles to break the 200bhp mark.

 

I'm just thinking in the context of 90% of people who'd be interested in engine conversions doing it purely on a bang for buck basis, rather than the 10% or less who'll build a race engine, the 180bhp version is probably worth the extra couple of hundred quid.

[simpsonrc 3]

I’ve been track daying my 206 gti 180 for 4 years and the engine has never missed a beat an still hasn’t on bodies. I think it’s a mega engine

[Matt180 31]

not great then!

 

Was actually 202bhp and 167 lbft, must of made a mistake in my project thread. I have only ever given out figures from when the car was mapped aswell, on 2 different occasions the car made 206bhp and 211bhp. I take RR figures with a pinch of salt though!.

 

What ever way you look at it its a genuine 30-40 bhp increase on what a standard 180 engine makes, they rarely make 175bhp from what i have seen.

 

I would also like to point out that fitting my cams made little difference to peak power figures. I know of 2 other 180's making near 200bhp on standard cams, inlet and standalone ecu.