TeamSwift

Hey all, Geo dude here. I've been lurking and reading up for the past week or two but haven't really made any posts. (Was trying to get somewhat informed before I started asking any silly questions.)


Anyways, my question for you guys and gals would be, which of the engines provides the most room to work with in regards to HP improvements? I've seen a lot about the 1.0 3cyl being upgraded with cams and exhaust as well as enlarged TB. Those seem to be cheap and efficient fixes, but what else is there? Would you be better off starting a build off of a 1.0 or a 1.3, even 1.6l engine? I know each engine has their limitations in modification, but which (in your opinion) offers the most room for improvement?

I see a few members here claiming 250+ HP. And usually without massive $ spent, so I am very curious what could be done with a decent bankroll and a decent mechanic.

Thanks everyone.
Geo Dude

P.S. I apologize if this thread is in the wrong place, if so please feel free to move it!

_________________
Geo Dude...its a play on words.

I would say the 1.6 with the 1.3 dohc head. Dont believe everything you read in regards to hp and tq or you will be very disappointed when you do your build. I have heard guys on here make the claim that you make more out of the gt 1.3 then the 1.6. Which everyone is allowed theyre own oppion but the fact is you will make more power out of a larger motor. You take a motor that has the same modifications as in the 1.0 1.3 or 1.6 and you put boost to it with the same compression everything and you will say make 100hp 125hp and 150hp. But it is all up to you. No matter what you do unless you cahnge the trans to something stronger you will only go so fast. And thats also why i say dont believe the numbers. I have heard a guy claiming 400whp on the stock trans that everyone else breaks over and over again. Thanks Stephen

Thanks man. I've actually heard surprisingly little about the dohc. I would assume it has a higher starting HP and top speed simply because of the twin cams and higher displacement. Ive read a bit about the GTI trans being the most structurally sound, which makes sense.

So Stephen, you think the 1.6 Esteem engine replaced by the twin cam 1.3 dohc as well as the GTI 5 speed trans would provide the best starting setup, right?

_________________
Geo Dude...its a play on words.

GTi 5 speed is the same as the other 5 speeds, The T3 differential is stronger, but other than that, all internals are the same. Find a 1.6 manual trans if you can, I've heard the internals are better. Also the 1.6 block has a different bellhousing pattern and you'll need to get/fabricate an adapter plate (samurai/tracker people make these, look online).

_________________

'99 Metro Sedan Auto 4cyl, '91 Metro Vert 3/5, '91 Metro 5dr 3cyl auto

Or the esteem trans. They are the same garbage trans soposently but they have the 1.6 bellhousing. A stock trans may get you by for a bit but if its a factory unit dont expect it to last. I have a hyundai trans in mine and so far so good. But im about to change coils and then go to 21psi and then the real test begins. Thanks Stephen

If I were to use the 1.6 head and trans why not just drop an entire esteem setup in it? Are there any benefits/advantages of keeping the crank stock?

_________________
Geo Dude...its a play on words.

I would say 1.3 dohc head and the 1.6 block. I havent had a problem with the stock crank. Other guys are spending alot of money to put a stock honda crank in them. I havent actually seen any proof of someone bending one or breaking one. You can get away with the stock trans if you ride the clutch taking off or wait untill you are rolling to get on it. And baby your shifts.

Makes sense to me. My only fear is building an engine that is so frankensteined that I can't modify it due to lack of parts. It is time to ask a newbie question, are the cams in the esteem the same as the swift?

_________________
Geo Dude...its a play on words.

I dont know about the cams. You would have to look into what cr you want but honda d16 pistons would probably be the best because vitaras are somethings like 6.8 to 1 with the 1.3 head. The rods just get a set of honda d16 rods and order 1mm oversized bearings for them. They are about .1inch shorter but flat tops should be in the 8-9cr range. The crank should be fine. It has a main between each cyl and is made form a fairly good material. Yes it does have hallow journals but from my understanding from a machining standpoint is hallow means the whole part got thourouly heat treated. And a solid crank the material inside is still soft. The best example i was given is top fuel axles used to be hallow. To save weight and add strength. And the other was try bending a small pipe out of decent material compared to a solid piece and usually the hallow is stronger. So unless you are going for crazy power the crank should be fine. The rods are as above and same with pistons. Arp main studs, head studs, mls headgasket. You are now ready for some power. The 1.6 oil pump is a bigger pump already. I used the 1.6 sidekick which is 24lbs with a spec stage 3 clutch kit. 1.3 crank pulley. And everything else would be 1.3. so sourcing parts isnt as bad as it sounds. Mainly if someone else already has done it. Now its up to you. You could try the suzuki trans and baby your shifts and launches and it might hold for a bit but between my two swift im on number 10 so i didnt want it. With the 1.6 you will have alot and i mean alot more tq. So you wont have to rev it as hard. I like me some low end tq meaning you can run a longer gear so you still get good highway milage. But thats just all my opinion. You have to decide what is enough for you. A stock 1.3 with arp heads and mls on stock pistons will take 15 to 20psi with a standalone computer and a good tune. Which is a handfull but like i said i like tq and i figured hell why not the head bolts on it. Thanks Stephen

Thanks, I appreciate that info. My end goal is to have a high torque high horsepower monster that can still handle highway speeds. So a taller gear would be appreciated.

_________________
Geo Dude...its a play on words.