1.6 To 1.9 Conversion?

[McPikie 0]

Yes, I know there is a guide on the front page, but I am considering this as I have been offered a rottor 205 for uber cheapness, and thinking of putting the lump in my 1600.

 

Obv, I would keep the 1.6 box for acceleration, but am I really going to notice much difference of 15bhp? Plus, am a tad worried that, if its been abused, it will be down on power, making the swap useless. I just want a budget B-road bruiser and the MI or GTI-6 conversions look a tad on the highside for a car that started out a £500 shed, lol

 

Plus, its basically a case of swapping the engine in full (inc all injectors etc etc) ant the ECU??

[gti-si 0]

The engiine swap in swap is basiaclly straight, lump for lump. You can add things like an oil cooler but it isn't neccesary. You will need the 1900 engine managment such as the ECU, AFM, injectors and dizzy. You'd be lucky seeing 15bhp difference to be honest, most 1900's don't make stock anyway, having said that your 1600 was probably down too. The power delivery will be slightly different on the 1.9 and many people find it as less happy to rev freely as the 1600. To be honest i'd prefer to use the money uprgading parts like the suspension and steering componets rather than upgrade to a 1900 8v. it's abit of a waste of money and would be much more worth saving for a 16v

[Daxed 7]

Sound reply from si.

 

Don't bother with an 8v / 8v conversion if everything is working ok. A fully sorted 1.6 is a grin to drive. So spend the budget on making it stop and handle even better, don't forget tyre quality, it's a good cheap upgrade if all the designed Pug bits' are working as they should. Also will serve well as a platform if your funds reach the 16v level.

Get it to a state where you enjoy driving it.

[steve@cornwall 100]

Did the swap on mine- put a rebuilt 1.9 in my 1.6 which was poorly sick - I wouldn't bother again. IMO the 1.6 is much more fun to drive, my cti makes me smile more whenever it hits the magic 4K - That punch is missing in the 1.9 as it pulls better at low revs, just seems more "tame" than a GOOD 1.6.

[Alastairh 47]

Don't waste your time...

 

Save for a 6!

[DaveW 6]

keep the 1.6 but upgrade the rest of the car to 1.9 spec.

[Atari Boy 11]

I have a 1.6 that with luick by next Sunday will have a 1.9 in it, so I will let you know what I think. I am more than happy with the 1.6, even though it has done 156,000. Yes I would like more power but I hope a 1.9 8 v lump with a 1.6 gearbox will be it a bit of fun. Time will tell.

[James_R 3]

I'd swap in a snap of the eye, delivery is less inspired than the 1600, but it's faster, and you can be more brutal as you have the power on demand to drag it about on the throttle.

 

If you keep the 1.6 box, flywheel you'll get a very buzz quick to rev set up, it will run out of steam at 5.5k but it will shuffle you up the road faster. if you want something harder to drive, then the 1600 is more work to keep on the boil, want something just quick and fun the 1900 swap is pretty good each to their own though I guess.

[Miles 331 1 Cars]

I'd say go with it to, You can never beat extra CC's,

I;ve done this on my CTi and the engine is still nice and revvy and allot better on the Motorway as long as you keep the 1.9 box

[Atari Boy 11]

I have always struggled with the idea of going over 4,000 revs anyway, I have had diesel daily drivers for 6 years now and am used to running out a power after 4,500 rpm.

 

I will be using a 1.6 box and flywheel so can’t wait.

[McPikie 0]

I struggle to come under 4k, lol

 

My 1600 lives in the readline, but getting there seems a bit gutless, which is why I thought the 1900 on a 1600 box would be a decent upgrade for a few month

[Anthony 1,003]

If it's a good 1.9 lump then go for it, but if it's a tired lazy engine then don't bother.... unless your 1.6 is somewhat of a weedy example too.

 

A good 1.9 engine on a 1.6 flywheel/box is a riot frankly - leaving it on 1.6 ECU/AFM/injectors is fine too

[Atari Boy 11]

Which is best though, I though a 1.9 with 1.9 afm/ecu/injectors would be better.

[Anthony 1,003]

Which is best though, I though a 1.9 with 1.9 afm/ecu/injectors would be better.

Ideally yes, but I've done a few 1.9 conversions using all the original 1.6 bits and they've been fine despite alot of abuse on track. Interestingly, both of the conversions I've done this way during the past year year have turned out to be some of the quickest standard 1.9 8v's I've driven - whether that's just a coincidence I'm not sure, but certainly it's enough to confirm that there's no power loss.

 

The 1.6 injectors will probably struggle to flow enough fuel for a heavily modified 1.9 engine, but certainly on a standard(ish) engine they're more than upto the job in my experience and certainly worth using if you don't have the 1.9 management and/or you know your current 1.6 stuff is good.

 

The important thing though is to ensure you don't mix 1.6 and 1.9 AFM/ECU/injectors, as that's a receipe for messed up fuelling - keep it either all 1.6 or all 1.9.

[Guest mattyh]

My 205 was a 1.6 gti when i first got it, had good fun tearing aound in it for 5 hours until it went pop! I then rebuilt and fitted a 1.9 lump leaving the 1.6 box. I cant really comment on which was better but the 1.9 was definitely good fun.

Even after a rebuild (rings, shells, head cleaned, valves ground etc) it didnt get to the 130bhp, after rolling rolled it made 122bhp. You will want to know how good the two engines are before doing the swap.

[McPikie 0]

Antony, So it's safe to just throw a 1900 bottom end on, as I have the 115bhp 1600 unit, which I am led to believe runs the 1900 head in any event