TeamSwift

Home of the Suzuki mini-compacts ! Your Home for all things Suzuki Swift, Geo Metro, Holden Barina, Chevy Sprint, Pontiac Firefly, and Suzuki Cultus. TeamSwift is a technical performance oriented community!
It is currently Sun Aug 20, 2017 6:28 pm

Underbody braces, turbos and more!

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 24 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: 160hp N/A possible?
PostPosted: Thu Aug 01, 2013 4:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2006 7:01 pm
Posts: 112
Location: St.Thomas
I'm familiar with old ford kent xflows and pintos, but have decided to explore my options on newer engines than are readily available in my country, since they is now a clubman class which would allow me to use any engine 0-1600 cc in my mk1 escort.

Is obtaining 160hp flywheel relatively easy using a Sohc 16 heads??
Valve sizes have to remain standard but porting and camshafts are free. How strong are the standard 13/16 bottom halfs? i know with the 1.6 would have to be careful and limit your revs to 7500rpm. But would it not be easier and reliable to get the power needed with less revs and more torque from the 1.6??

I have basically 1298, 1324 and 1598 bottom halfs at my disposal.

_________________
All or nuttin


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 160hp N/A possible?
PostPosted: Fri Nov 15, 2013 4:07 am 
Offline
@ssclown

Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 7:58 am
Posts: 756
Location: not here
Too bad nobody answered this question. I own 5 of these sedans now and I'm really liking them. My daily driver is currently a 1998 Chevrolet Metro 4 dr sdn 5 speed manual. I just noticed tonight that those four wheel drive trackers of the same year have a 1.6 litre engine. It would be cool if that engine was a straight drop in swap to the sedan and I could get it up to 160 hp.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 160hp N/A possible?
PostPosted: Fri Nov 15, 2013 8:58 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2005 11:43 pm
Posts: 776
Location: Greer,South Carolina USA
Yea that's true but you have to have adapter then you have no room on passenger side. It is a lot taller also.

_________________
Cars and Harleys


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 160hp N/A possible?
PostPosted: Fri Nov 15, 2013 6:53 pm 
Offline
@ssclown

Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 7:58 am
Posts: 756
Location: not here
Next time I'm at the wreckers if there's a Tracker I'm going to go and look at the 1.6 in it. Apparently they have one Tracker that's supposed to have a 1.6 TBI in it.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 160hp N/A possible?
PostPosted: Fri Nov 15, 2013 7:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 7:17 pm
Posts: 1384
Location: Alberta, Canada
Tracker 1.6 tbi isn't a terribly viable swap. In your 98+ models with 1.3 you can swap in Suzuki esteem 1.6, a member here has done it. Fair amount of work, but not awful and he kindly documented a lot of the tricky parts of the swap to show how he did it. This also requires tearing down a swift style 1.3 trans and an esteem gearbox to get the proper engine side on the trans for the 1.6 which has a different bell housing than 1.3's do. This only works with manual trans. I guess maybe auto could be done with an adapter plate, but I can't see it being worth the hassle.
Want your 1.3 cars to have more power? Put a cam and exhaust on and your set. The 1.6 swap is a fair bit of work, especially if you have a good 1.3 16v in the car already. Don't get me wrong, I think it is great when finished, just realize what your getting into before you start!

_________________
1995 Swift w/16V 4.39s, 3tech cam, Esteem t-body, Header, needs more.
1995 Gt Mustang "Boss Shinoda" package.
1999 F150 4x4 Supercharged
1967 Mustang 428 auto, never ending expensive project
1993 Civic si h22a, fell in my lap, couldn't resist!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 160hp N/A possible?
PostPosted: Fri Nov 15, 2013 8:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 10:08 pm
Posts: 625
Location: texas houston
coasterII wrote:
Too bad nobody answered this question. I own 5 of these sedans now and I'm really liking them. My daily driver is currently a 1998 Chevrolet Metro 4 dr sdn 5 speed manual. I just noticed tonight that those four wheel drive trackers of the same year have a 1.6 litre engine. It would be cool if that engine was a straight drop in swap to the sedan and I could get it up to 160 hp.
this thread may answer your question many people have asked before so here it ishttp://www.teamswift.net/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=53775


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 160hp N/A possible?
PostPosted: Fri Nov 15, 2013 8:20 pm 
Offline
@ssclown

Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 7:58 am
Posts: 756
Location: not here
codyb76 wrote:
Want your 1.3 cars to have more power? Put a cam and exhaust on and your set.


For sure losing the cat and putting a bigger exhaust on will be the first thing I do because its far and away the easiest upgrade, and the stock exhaust looks so ridiculously small it'll probably be a good bang for the buck. A cam sounds like an easy upgrade too and I like the fact that I can read up on Teamswift about other people who've done the exact same cam upgrade. I once put a cam in my Z28 and it was so bad at lower speeds I took it out and put the stock one back in. An expensive way to learn. Although now I understand variable valve timing pretty good.
Anything more than than upgrading the exhaust on that '98 4 Dr Sdn will be a bit down the road though because I've got so many other cars I better get going again before their piston rings rust themselves to the cylinder walls.
Thanks for the 1.3 upgrade advice, I know you know what you're talking about because from reading teamswift I know you've worked on tons of these cars. I'm definitely more interested at this point, until I get all my cars back on the road again, in quick and easy performance upgrades as opposed to major projects. At some point though I want to build something that will beat Mercedes and BMWs, 'cause I don't think even a cheap Porsche 911 is in the cards any time soon.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 160hp N/A possible?
PostPosted: Fri Nov 15, 2013 8:37 pm 
Offline
@ssclown

Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 7:58 am
Posts: 756
Location: not here
RP91gt wrote:
coasterII wrote:
Too bad nobody answered this question. I own 5 of these sedans now and I'm really liking them. My daily driver is currently a 1998 Chevrolet Metro 4 dr sdn 5 speed manual. I just noticed tonight that those four wheel drive trackers of the same year have a 1.6 litre engine. It would be cool if that engine was a straight drop in swap to the sedan and I could get it up to 160 hp.
this thread may answer your question many people have asked before so here it ishttp://www.teamswift.net/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=53775


What an awesome car. thanks for posting that link. Bolting 4 bike carbs on doesn't look too difficult either, I like the simplicity of it.( I've got a 1972 Kawasaki 350cc 2 stroke triple, not running yet.) Mandatory emissions testing ends December 31, 2014 in B.C. so that carb setup is street legal then so far as I can see. I'm going to make a project of pricing out all those parts. That's the car and engine I want, eventually. I wonder what it sounds like? And I know high compression is the way to go, my '68 barracuda 340s had 11.5 to 1 compression stock from the factory.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 160hp N/A possible?
PostPosted: Fri Nov 15, 2013 8:51 pm 
Offline
@ssclown

Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 7:58 am
Posts: 756
Location: not here
codyb76 wrote:
especially if you have a good 1.3 16v in the car already.

Its only SOHC, but I like its 4 injectors and intake, my other 4 sedans all have one injector TBI. I'm going to go and take the valve cover off to see how many valves its got. And the engine is very healthy. I've only driven it three weeks and I've already got the clutch slipping, although I should check the clutch cable adjustment.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 160hp N/A possible?
PostPosted: Fri Nov 15, 2013 9:02 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 7:17 pm
Posts: 1384
Location: Alberta, Canada
North American 98-01 models with the 4cyl have a g13 16v sohc. The tbi ones are 8valves

_________________
1995 Swift w/16V 4.39s, 3tech cam, Esteem t-body, Header, needs more.
1995 Gt Mustang "Boss Shinoda" package.
1999 F150 4x4 Supercharged
1967 Mustang 428 auto, never ending expensive project
1993 Civic si h22a, fell in my lap, couldn't resist!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 160hp N/A possible?
PostPosted: Fri Nov 15, 2013 11:00 pm 
Offline
@ssclown

Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 7:58 am
Posts: 756
Location: not here
codyb76 wrote:
North American 98-01 models with the 4cyl have a g13 16v sohc. The tbi ones are 8valves


Awesome, It's a monsoon outside and pitch black so I didn't get around to popping the valve cover and now I don't have to, thanks. I'm going to start collecting '98 to '01 sedans. At some point I'm going to build that car RP91GT posted the link to and put two Toyota Mister Too superchargers on it and nitrous. And leave it looking bone stock. That car is sorta quick bone stock. I've already ripped out half the carpet and sound deadener and the passenger seat. It needs more lightening. All these people pull up beside it in Chevy Cavaliers and whatnot thinking its a Granny car and then I pass them and pull in front of them, its a blast. It's not as quick as any of my Mk1 turbos, but its not slow.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 160hp N/A possible?
PostPosted: Sat Nov 16, 2013 6:34 am 
Offline
@ssclown

Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 7:58 am
Posts: 756
Location: not here
codyb76 wrote:
Tracker 1.6 tbi isn't a terribly viable swap. In your 98+ models with 1.3 you can swap in Suzuki esteem 1.6, a member here has done it. Fair amount of work




I've rethought the whole thing. The only reason I bought the five sedans is to keep my stuff out of sight of the window shopping crackheads, which I can't do with my Mk1 turbos because they don't have a trunk. Actually, that's why I bought three of them. I bought the two others cause they were so cheap I couldn't pass them up, 100 bucks and 300 bucks. But since then I realized I can replace the back and rear side windows of a Mk1 turbo with aluminum panels and build an aluminum wall behind the front seats and I have an even bigger trunk in a much lighter and faster car. So I'm just going to do the easier and faster cam and exhaust upgrade you suggest on the 98 1.3 liter sedan.
Why put a whole bunch of time fitting a big engine into the heavier and slower sedan when I could put that same time into cramming a big engine into a much lighter and faster Mk1 turbo? I know where I can get a 2001 Esteem 1.8 liter engine cheap. If I put a turbo or supercharger on that and 4 bike carbs and high compression pistons and head and crammed it into one of my Mk1s then I'd have a much faster car than the same engine in the heavier sedan. I could gut the car and even take out the wipers and wiper motor and heater and blower to lighten it. I could drive one of my other cars on cold and rainy days. Or just rainex the windows and wear a sweater and leave the rear vent windows open. That would be a fast car, something worth putting the time, money and effort into.
I just checked. That 2001 1.8 litre esteem engine is 122 hp stock. All that stuff I said would probably put it over 200hp. I could probably lighten a 1600 lb Mk1 by 200 lbs.
I also see where I can get a mildly smacked up 2001 esteem 1.8 litre 4 Dr Sedan with 5 speed manual transmission and overdrive for 500 bucks. And I bet I could get it for less. But they weigh over 2200 lbs. and I have no idea how you would lighten that by 800 lbs.
My 1998 chevy metro 4 door sedan weighs 1,984 lbs.
My 1987 Chevy Sprint carburetteds weigh 1,488 lbs.

That 1.8 litre Esteem engine and trans are going into one of my Mk1 carburetteds with 4 bike carbs, turbocharging or supercharging, nitrous, etc. etc.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 160hp N/A possible?
PostPosted: Sat Nov 16, 2013 9:38 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2004 9:48 am
Posts: 725
Location: Winnipeg
1.8's don't fit into Mark 1's without a lot of cutting...as the engine/trans is just too wide to fit between the frame rails. Bike carbs don't go well with turbo use, unless you know a LOT about setting up carbs for blow thru pressure charging. Micro or Mega squirt EFI is a very good solution for these cheap cars.
If you turbo'ed a 1.3 in a Mark 1 car (relatively easy fit in the car) your 200 HP mark is realistic, and
You can get a Mark 1 under 1500 lbs, and at 200 or more HP, it would be plenty fast. Your Mark 1 turbo gearboxes are a bolt up to the 1.3, and seem to be the strongest Suzuki ones I've found...other than the bigger cable shift trans.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 160hp N/A possible?
PostPosted: Sat Nov 16, 2013 7:48 pm 
Offline
@ssclown

Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 7:58 am
Posts: 756
Location: not here
Thanks Mr. Pipe, I have a couple of Mark 1 carbed cars with automatic transmissions and dysfunctional engines that are at the absolute bottom of the list of my cars that I am going to fix so I wouldn't care if I cut and hammered and welded the piss out of those so next time I'm out at that 2001 1.8 litre esteem I'm going to take a tape measure and camera. You're right though, and cody b touched on the same thing, some projects are going to take a lot of time, so I'd have to think hard about whether I'll finish something befiore I start. I see abandoned project cars for sale for cheap all the time. The thing is though, If I just fit a 1.8 litre esteem engine and trans into a Mark1, without doing anything at all to the engine, I have a 122 hp Mark 1 with minimal cash outlay. The welding and cutting and fabrication wouldn't have to be pretty, it would just have to work. I really like that 1.3 turbo suggestion into the Mk1 of yours. Sounds like a minimum of cutting and fabrication and fitting, pretty much a bolt on. I could just take my time and gather all the parts as I found them for cheap then once they're all together bolt them in. And use a brand new and inexpensive and readily available turbocharger, whatever that might be.


Last edited by coasterII on Sat Nov 16, 2013 7:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 160hp N/A possible?
PostPosted: Sat Nov 16, 2013 7:50 pm 
Offline
@ssclown

Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 7:58 am
Posts: 756
Location: not here
Mr.Pipe wrote:
...other than the bigger cable shift trans.



Is the bigger cable shift trans the trans on the 1.8 litre Esteem?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 160hp N/A possible?
PostPosted: Sat Nov 16, 2013 8:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2004 9:48 am
Posts: 725
Location: Winnipeg
I think the info is on here...try search..
But as I recall, the Canadian 1.6 sedan, 1.8 esteem wagon,and Aerio manual trans are all of the same family of cable shift transmissions. I've never used one myself however.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 160hp N/A possible?
PostPosted: Sat Nov 16, 2013 11:25 pm 
Offline
@ssclown

Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 7:58 am
Posts: 756
Location: not here
The weight of my 90 and 94 sedans is 1,694 lbs, only 210 lbs more than the 87 sprint carbed manual trans and 290 lbs less than the 97 and 98 sedans, and, oddly enough, only 50 pounds more than the 90 to 94 2dr hatchback,( that hatch and its hatch glass on the hatchback aren't light, I've carried them around before) the 90 sedan is the one I got for 100 bucks. its a 1.3 litre with manual trans and I drove it home after I bought but it had a banging noise like a wasted connecting rod bearing so it needs a new engine anyway. That's the one I should put a 200 horsepower turbocharged 1.3 liter into. It's still relatively light, it has a trunk, and it will look bone stock and inconspicuous. And I like those sedans.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 160hp N/A possible?
PostPosted: Sat Nov 16, 2013 11:37 pm 
Offline
@ssclown

Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 7:58 am
Posts: 756
Location: not here
Mr.Pipe wrote:
I think the info is on here...try search..
But as I recall, the Canadian 1.6 sedan, 1.8 esteem wagon,and Aerio manual trans are all of the same family of cable shift transmissions. I've never used one myself however.


I searched " esteem manual transmission" and " esteem transmission" and got " no suitable matches found. No sweat, I'll be seeing some esteems sooner or later and I will go and look. I'm pretty sure my corollas were cable shift, they shifted fine. I like the idea of putting the transmission from a 2200 lb. car into a 1500 lb. car because the clutch and trans will both be stronger.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 160hp N/A possible?
PostPosted: Sun Nov 17, 2013 4:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2003 4:21 pm
Posts: 591
Location: Durham, UK
Hi,

In UK, we have an engine builder used to build 180Bhp NA engine.
I'm not sure what he did to get this much power but it is possible. My good friend has built G13B with Honda pistons to get 11.5:1 and I think he is getting 160Bhp in his rally car.
I think he used 76mm bore and my group A camshafts. He is using Janvey ITBs setup, iirc.

Good luck.
Atchi


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 160hp N/A possible?
PostPosted: Sun Nov 17, 2013 6:41 pm 
Offline
@ssclown

Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 7:58 am
Posts: 756
Location: not here
miniswift wrote:

In UK, we have an engine builder used to build 180Bhp NA engine.


What displacement engine was that? I've figured out that if the Suzuki Esteem 1.6 litre, 1.8 litre, etc. etc. series of engines and transmissions all have the same external dimensions then I should put the one with the biggest displacement in. The cutting and widening of the passenger side frame rail by an inch and a half, welding in new motor mounts and whatnot, and swapping bellhousings are all going to take exactly the same effort whether you're installing the smallest displacement engine of the series or the largest.
And the esteem engine swap is the way to go. That cutting and widening and welding of the frame rail is easy for me, I've done lots of it MIG welding of that thin stuff. And with just an Esteem engine and trans plus your original 1.3 engine and trans you have every part you need, except for, it sounds like, just one motor mount. I'm going to do this instead of turboing a 1.3 because turboing the 1.3 means tracking down a whole pile of parts which could take a lot of time and a lot of money, instead of just buying one used engine and trans and you're done so far as parts acquisition goes. What is the biggest displacement Esteem engine of the 1.6litre, 1.8litre, etc. series with manual trans and what year Esteem was it in? And thanks very much to G16b for doing that great article with pictures at the top of this forum on how to do this swap.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 160hp N/A possible?
PostPosted: Tue Nov 19, 2013 4:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2003 4:21 pm
Posts: 591
Location: Durham, UK
The above figure is from G13B engine so 1298 or 1330cc.

Cheers
Atchi


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 160hp N/A possible?
PostPosted: Tue Nov 19, 2013 6:41 pm 
Offline
@ssclown

Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 7:58 am
Posts: 756
Location: not here
miniswift wrote:
The above figure is from G13B engine so 1298 or 1330cc.

Cheers
Atchi


Thanks, the more I read on Teamswift about boosting power, overboring, increasing displacement, adding turbo or nitrous or engine swapping the more I realize that putting a good used G13B into one of my Mk1s, then upgrading it over time as I acquire better parts, turbos, etc. is the way for me to go. It would be the easiest way to put together a faster car. I wonder though if a bone stock G13b without turbo is going to be faster than a bone stock g10 with turbo. If it isn't then replacing a turbo G10 with a non turbo G13b would be a downgrade. I am going to start looking into what's needed and involved in turboing a G13B.
Maybe dropping in a J18 might be quicker and cheaper to do, but I suspect it will be burning much more gas all the time, so I will tend to not to want to drive it, whereas a turboed g13b will only be burning a lot more gas when I stomp on it and light up the turbo. A turboed G13b is also going to have more power and better driveability in the turbo off mode than a G10T operating in the turbo off mode. I'm also curious as to what would be the highest compression ratio you run 94 octane gas at in a g13b(non turbo) and what sort of power that would have as compared to a G10turbo.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 160hp N/A possible?
PostPosted: Tue Nov 19, 2013 7:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2004 9:48 am
Posts: 725
Location: Winnipeg
This might help you a bit.
G10 3 cylinder and G13's are the same family, just 3 cylinder vs 4 cylinder. The G13 is 84mm longer in overall engine length than the G10, and when replacing a G10, with a G13, the transmission is shifted 84mm toward the drivers side of the car(North American drivers side that is)...and suitable axles must be sourced.
The G16 is also the same family of engine, and is the same length at the G13, but is 25mm taller. It would be close to the bottom of hood of a Mark 1 car...maybe touching depending what head you are using on it. The 1.8 Esteem engine is MUCH bigger, and is the the same family as the Aerio engines
2.0, and 2.3 They will not fit under the hood of a Mark1 car, nor will they fit between the frame rails.

I have a set-up for putting a 1.3 in a Mark 1 that I would sell if there is interest.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 160hp N/A possible?
PostPosted: Tue Nov 19, 2013 9:17 pm 
Offline
@ssclown

Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 7:58 am
Posts: 756
Location: not here
Mr.Pipe wrote:

I have a set-up for putting a 1.3 in a Mark 1 that I would sell if there is interest.


There's lots of interest. I have about ten Mk1s, turboed and carbed, and not one of them is driveable, mainly because of blown headgaskets. I've got five supposedly good used engines to swap in, but recently when I noticed this idea of putting J18s out of an Esteem into a swift or Sprint I thought maybe I'd try that. But after reading a lot of Teamswift articles I'm thinking a turboed G13b would be the best upgrade for me to get into at the moment.
My current DD is a 98 Metro 4 dr sedan, with the 4 injector manifold and, it turns out, 16 valves, which has seriously made me lose interest in doing any work at all on my other 4 sedans which are all 1 injector TBI, other than engine upgrades. I've paid another Teamswifter to replace some seals to fix a bad oil leak in my 97 sedan, which is done, and I'm plodding along about halfway through putting a new clutch in my 94 Swift sedan. Next up is going to be getting all the Mk1 turbos and carbeds back on the road, with engine swaps and headgasket replacements, which is where I'm thinking now that an upgrade to a turboed G13b is in the cards. In the meantime I'm going to buy every 98 to 2001 sedan with the 4 injectors and 16 valves that I see for cheap. I sent you a PM about that G13b swap stuff, thanks.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 24 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group