[gumwall123]

Hi ive got 94 suzuki sierra thinking about putting 1.6 vitara motor or gti motor in it for better speed on the road .I just wanted some people opinions which conversion is best . It has A/C so i dont want to loose that thanks.

[BlueSuzy]

The G16b vitara/baleno will be better than the Gti g13b

[zukmeista]

BlueSuzy wrote:

The G16b vitara/baleno will be better than the Gti g13b

Not really, Gti would be much better for sand and road driving, plus you don't have to buy an adaptor kit.

[shep]

zukmeista wrote:

BlueSuzy wrote:

The G16b vitara/baleno will be better than the Gti g13b

Not really, Gti would be much better for sand and road driving, plus you don't have to buy an adaptor kit.

Why is a child that doesn't own tools giving advice?

[matty_wall]

If legalities bother you, probably go gti. If not, go g16b.

[mnemonix]

In NSW both of those engines require engineering in a sierra. Your legality reply is a dud.

[matty_wall]

RTA told me its fine and I just put my ute through a blue slip with a gti motor in it.. seems its a very grey area then.

[Daz7]

mnemonix wrote:

In NSW both of those engines require engineering in a sierra. Your legality reply is a dud.

That's incorrect, only the 1.6 will require engineering in NSW

[mnemonix]

You'll get information both ways and it's been argued here many times so I won't wave the can of worms. Be cautious and do your homework through official channels is all I'll suggest.

[Daz7]

mnemonix wrote:

You'll get information both ways and it's been argued here many times so I won't wave the can of worms. Be cautious and do your homework through official channels is all I'll suggest.

Theres no argument, in NSW a NA 1.3 GTI engine conversion is entirely legal with only an engine number change. Its one of the reasons I'm going down this track.

VSI-06 explains this

Do I need an engineering signatory for minor modifications?

Vehicle modifications fall into three distinct categories:
• ‘Owner certified’ minor modifications which can be accepted for registration purposes without formal
certification.
• ‘Engineering signatory certified’ modified production vehicles.
• Engineering signatory certified’ individually constructed vehicles.

Owner certified minor modifications are generally those modifications which were optional equipment for the vehicle
concerned. Owner certified modifications also include some non-standard modifications of a minor nature which do
not affect the level of safety, strength or reliability of vital systems such as brakes and steering. These modifications have
little or no impact upon the vehicle’s level of compliance with the Australian Design Rules.
Examples of minor (owner certified) modifications are:

• Engine changes where the capacity increase is less than 15% above the maximum size engine available for the
vehicle (providing no major structural modifications are necessary and where noise and/or exhaust emission
ADRs apply, all standard equipment such as carburettors, exhaust systems, exhaust gas recirculating valves,
oxygen sensors and catalytic convertors relating to noise and emission control are retained and operate
correctly).

[Jackson]

Daz7 wrote:

Owner certified modifications also include some non-standard modifications of a minor nature which do
not affect the level of safety

This is still a little bit open ended, what defines a minor modification? Does going from a carby to EFI come under a minor mod?

It might come down to you find a guy who does your blueslip that says "well hey that is a pretty major mod you need and engineers report" but the next guy says whatever.

I also remember something when I had to get one a while back, it was owner certified had to fall within a 15% capacity increase and 15% power increase (in this case a GTI needs a certification), has the last bit been removed?

[masterA]

Whichever you can get cheaper
It really depends on what terrain you're going to drive also

Despite what alot of people say/think about the GTi conversion i absolutelly love it
I've got a GTi conversion in both my cars and love the revs and onroad handeling it gives
The 1.6 has better torque down low but with reduction gears the GTi is just as good
The advantage is that the GTi will let you rev past 7,500rpm (with a $100 chip it'll go past 8,500rpm) which in WA and the poweder sand we get here is a very big advantage

As for RTA and engineering cert, here in WA at least it is NOT required if you fit a 1.3 GTi engine
I was there a few months ago re-registering and all i had to do was change the engine number with the RTA

Good luck with your choice

[JrZook]

Jackson wrote:

Daz7 wrote:

Owner certified modifications also include some non-standard modifications of a minor nature which do
not affect the level of safety

This is still a little bit open ended, what defines a minor modification? Does going from a carby to EFI come under a minor mod?

It might come down to you find a guy who does your blueslip that says "well hey that is a pretty major mod you need and engineers report" but the next guy says whatever.

I also remember something when I had to get one a while back, it was owner certified had to fall within a 15% capacity increase and 15% power increase (in this case a GTI needs a certification), has the last bit been removed?

I'm sure I read somewhere that a fuel system change (low pressure to high pressure) does require a mod plate or something like that

[Daz7]

Jackson wrote:

Daz7 wrote:

Owner certified modifications also include some non-standard modifications of a minor nature which do
not affect the level of safety

This is still a little bit open ended, what defines a minor modification? Does going from a carby to EFI come under a minor mod?

It might come down to you find a guy who does your blueslip that says "well hey that is a pretty major mod you need and engineers report" but the next guy says whatever.

I also remember something when I had to get one a while back, it was owner certified had to fall within a 15% capacity increase and 15% power increase (in this case a GTI needs a certification), has the last bit been removed?

Its not open ended at all, the document states that if you have same to same capacity your ok, whether its carb or injection it doesn't matter nowhere in the RMS documentation does it state that.

However, if your adding forced induction thats where the percentages come in.

This is in NSW, not sure of other states.

[squibby]

Daz7 wrote:

Jackson wrote:

Daz7 wrote:

Owner certified modifications also include some non-standard modifications of a minor nature which do
not affect the level of safety

This is still a little bit open ended, what defines a minor modification? Does going from a carby to EFI come under a minor mod?

It might come down to you find a guy who does your blueslip that says "well hey that is a pretty major mod you need and engineers report" but the next guy says whatever.

I also remember something when I had to get one a while back, it was owner certified had to fall within a 15% capacity increase and 15% power increase (in this case a GTI needs a certification), has the last bit been removed?

Its not open ended at all, the document states that if you have same to same capacity your ok, whether its carb or injection it doesn't matter nowhere in the RMS documentation does it state that.

However, if your adding forced induction thats where the percentages come in.

This is in NSW, not sure of other states.

Daz7, it is open ended mate and the RTA have done that on purpose so that people stick to the 'principle' of this vSI 06 rather then the RTA having to type maintain a massive document with specifics for which engines can or can't be put into every vehicle ever made. You need to refer to section 2. The first paragraph says :- ".....Owners should note that an engine might not be suitable even though it's capacity falls within the specified limits. Owners are therefore advised to check details of a proposed engine conversion with an engineering signatory before commencing work."

SO long as you have consulted with an approved engineer, - the RTA would be happy and you would be wise to pay said engineer for the consultation so that he can type up something official as a record that it's all A-ok.

Replacing a boggo sierra 1.3 with a performance 1.3 GTI engine is going to require engineering I reckon, since the GTI 1.3 is more then a 15% increase in performance, and that is essentially the principle behind the displacement rule.

[BlueSuzy]

Go to an engineer

They say papers not needed.

Rms say not needed



But wait, It must be engineered

[zukmeista]

shep wrote:

zukmeista wrote:

BlueSuzy wrote:

The G16b vitara/baleno will be better than the Gti g13b

Not really, Gti would be much better for sand and road driving, plus you don't have to buy an adaptor kit.

Why is a child that doesn't own tools giving advice?

You're a tosser I do have tools, justhaven't bought a drill yet

[BlueSuzy]

zukmeista wrote:

I am a tool

[Jackson]

Daz7 wrote:

Its not open ended at all

The thought of a government document that is definitive.

[cbzook]

mnemonix wrote:

In NSW both of those engines require engineering in a sierra. Your legality reply is a dud.

i put a gti in my zook an registered it this time last year. no engineering required just a blue slip with engine details change

[SierraDan]

Bump.

Keep talking.

[zukmeista]

How many threads are on here about G16 cracked block issues? Haven't seen anything like that about a G13B....

[gumwall123]

HEY thanks for the replys

[Gwagensteve]

squibby wrote:

You need to refer to section 2. The first paragraph says :- ".....Owners should note that an engine might not be suitable even though it's capacity falls within the specified limits. Owners are therefore advised to check details of a proposed engine conversion with an engineering signatory before commencing work."

SO long as you have consulted with an approved engineer, - the RTA would be happy and you would be wise to pay said engineer for the consultation so that he can type up something official as a record that it's all A-ok.

Replacing a boggo sierra 1.3 with a performance 1.3 GTI engine is going to require engineering I reckon, since the GTI 1.3 is more then a 15% increase in performance, and that is essentially the principle behind the displacement rule.

Bingo.

Let's use a more extreme example. Say I pulled out a 1.3 sierra motor and fitted a hayabusa motor. Same capacity, but the 'busa makes 196hp compared to 67hp. Does anybody think that exampe wouldn't need engineering approval?

I think the Victorian regs (used) to specify 10% as an output increase before an engineer needed consultation. I don't know if they still do.

Steve.

[gumwall123]

I wanted to say thanks for the responses its very helpfull

[losfer]

My engineer here in QLD says that the gti motor conversion does not need mod plate as long as the capacity is the same. Steves reference to fitting a hyabusa engine is a completely different kettle of fish .

[Gwagensteve]

I admit its an extreme case, but I'd also suggest going from 67 to 100hp and from a carby fuel system to an EFI fuel system is an extreme case - it's not really what the regs imply.

I'd suggest the intent of the guidelines is that it might be OK to replace a motor with a larger varaint of the same motor that makes slightly more power (lets say a newer version of an old holden 6 or something) but I can't imagine a 33% increase in power was what they had in mind.

Imagine buying an LS1 powered VT (250Kw) and dropping in a 330Kw version and rocking up for an inspection expecting it sail though - someones going to ask questions.

Steve.

[stockman]

Quote:

1.1 BASIC MODIFICATIONS NOT REQUIRING CERTIFICATION
The following are Basic Modifications that may be performed without certification providing the
modifications are carried out in compliance with the requirements detailed in Clause 2 General
Requirements:
- Fitting a replacement new, used or reconditioned engine;
- Fitting a manufacturer’s optional engine together with any associated components as
supplied by the manufacturer for that same model vehicle;
- Fitting replacement original equipment engine and exhaust components;
- Fitting replacement original equipment, equivalent or better, components that have no
influence on engine performance or emissions (e.g. higher volume oil pump than original);
and
- Fitting equivalent engines with an increase of up to 20% of original power.
In all of the above cases, if the engine is modified, it must be certified under the relevant Code
of Section LA.

[Daz7]

Gwagensteve wrote:

squibby wrote:

You need to refer to section 2. The first paragraph says :- ".....Owners should note that an engine might not be suitable even though it's capacity falls within the specified limits. Owners are therefore advised to check details of a proposed engine conversion with an engineering signatory before commencing work."

SO long as you have consulted with an approved engineer, - the RTA would be happy and you would be wise to pay said engineer for the consultation so that he can type up something official as a record that it's all A-ok.

Replacing a boggo sierra 1.3 with a performance 1.3 GTI engine is going to require engineering I reckon, since the GTI 1.3 is more then a 15% increase in performance, and that is essentially the principle behind the displacement rule.

Bingo.

Let's use a more extreme example. Say I pulled out a 1.3 sierra motor and fitted a hayabusa motor. Same capacity, but the 'busa makes 196hp compared to 67hp. Does anybody think that exampe wouldn't need engineering approval?

I think the Victorian regs (used) to specify 10% as an output increase before an engineer needed consultation. I don't know if they still do.

Steve.

The busa engine doesn't meet car emissions regs as a drop in, so needs to pass these so it's a moot point. (two have passed emissions however and live in Lotus 7 replicas).

The rms doesn't care if your going from carb to Eli, if it's a bolt in with same to same capacity. There is a 20% power increase clause thats a little obscure and not that we'll known about. I'd not talk about it.

[Gwagensteve]

Let's put the 20% power increase aside for a moment. (although, interestingly, even a G13BB exceeds the 20% ceiling) Who decides that the complete emissions control system of the donor car, and the correct EFI fuel lines, sealed filler cap etc have been installed as part of the conversion? These are normally the things an engineer will oversee.

This is an honest question, I'm not stirring the pot for the sake of it - is that stuff the responsibility of the roadworthy tester?



As an aside. We had approval of an F6A cappuccino conversion scuttled by an engineer many years ago. The F6A engine was 1/2 the capacity of the original engine, made the same power and torque as the factory carby 1.3, was installed with all the emissions control equipment from the donor car, the F6A had been ADR approved in a cappuccino, and was operating in its factory rev range at cruise.

The reasoning of the engineer was that the new motor couldn't be proved to meet ADR emissions in the new car as it had different aerodynamics and weight in the new car, so full ADR emissions testing would be required.

Steve.