[Fatzook]

Hybrid wrote:

Fatzook wrote:

joeblow wrote:

i'd rather an 8 valve tbi 1.6 anyday.

x2. 1.6TBI = AWESOME!!!

What's with the TBI loving? Honest question. I run a tbi g16 now but would prefer port injection. The 8 valve is more suited to forced induction from the research that i've done but otherwise I thought the tbi + 8 valve combo was the lesser of the 2 EFI G16s.

In reality it is. MPFI is always superior to TBI. That doesn't make the TBI any lesser motor. Mine was fantastic. I did upgrade to a MPFI version, and there is definately a worthwhile increase in power and torque, but for shear simplicity the TBI motor was a hands down winner.

[Fatzook]

SuziBlu wrote:

johno, i do not understand you theory that you need high revs for sand. Thats all I wheel on, and revs for sand is a strange concept.

Torque is what you need, torque will hold you there far far better than revs.


In any application.

Agreed. And I think revs are irrelevant for sand driving.

Wheel speed is what matters. A torquey V8 in 4th low doing 2500rpm would be miles better than a G13b in second doing 6500 rpm. Who has more revs to play with? Just an example

Torque is the cure for revs. If you have torque, then your need to rev is reduced greatly.

But hey.... Thats all I can see with my one eye

[jonno_racing]

bullshit.
unless sand is masivly diffrent in every other state... rev's and power is simply where its at imo. every time.

[JrZook]

Fatzook wrote:

Hybrid wrote:

Fatzook wrote:

joeblow wrote:

i'd rather an 8 valve tbi 1.6 anyday.

x2. 1.6TBI = AWESOME!!!

What's with the TBI loving? Honest question. I run a tbi g16 now but would prefer port injection. The 8 valve is more suited to forced induction from the research that i've done but otherwise I thought the tbi + 8 valve combo was the lesser of the 2 EFI G16s.

In reality it is. MPFI is always superior to TBI. That doesn't make the TBI any lesser motor. Mine was fantastic. I did upgrade to a MPFI version, and there is definately a worthwhile increase in power and torque, but for shear simplicity the TBI motor was a hands down winner.

Hybrid I dont think you can make that statement yet, your aint running 100%

[royce]

Momentum is what gets you through sand, having a power in reserve ready to go at any revs and speed is what keeps you out of the shit

Turbo Rotary

[JrZook]

jonno_racing wrote:

bullshit.
unless sand is masivly diffrent in every other state... rev's and power is simply where its at imo. every time.

Pete is again dead right, as soon and you come off your peanut usuable rev range you sunk!

[SuziBlu]

Not even, most often valve bouncing.

I find the G13 to be good at around 4,000, would like more power for the same revs.

This is why I am going to go to a G16B, more torque, less revs, far better combination.

[crewsy]

straty wrote:

I've thought about that it would probably be easier just change heads and pistons over but aparantly its not that good ? is it any better than standard GTI form ?

If your G16A was built by Suzisport, they chuck pistons in with valve reliefs for all their engines in case customers want to come back and convert to 16V MPFI

[atari4x4]

royce wrote:

Momentum is what gets you through sand, having a power in reserve ready to go at any revs and speed is what keeps you out of the shit

Turbo Rotary

being a bit of a sand monkey myself, the above statement is the right answer.

now we've got that one sorted, can anyone help the OP's original question?

[jake_]

I have just done the Gti conversion. It uses original engine mounts and the gearbox bolts straight up. So you should just be able to remove the 1600 and adapter's.

Have you got a turn key engine i.e. intake manifold, throttle body, engine loom, ecu ect?

If so you just need to sort out the distributor, fuel pump and an exhaust

Hope this helps answer your question

[Hybrid]

JrZook wrote:

Fatzook wrote:

Hybrid wrote:

Fatzook wrote:

joeblow wrote:

i'd rather an 8 valve tbi 1.6 anyday.

x2. 1.6TBI = AWESOME!!!

What's with the TBI loving? Honest question. I run a tbi g16 now but would prefer port injection. The 8 valve is more suited to forced induction from the research that i've done but otherwise I thought the tbi + 8 valve combo was the lesser of the 2 EFI G16s.

In reality it is. MPFI is always superior to TBI. That doesn't make the TBI any lesser motor. Mine was fantastic. I did upgrade to a MPFI version, and there is definately a worthwhile increase in power and torque, but for shear simplicity the TBI motor was a hands down winner.

Hybrid I dont think you can make that statement yet, your aint running 100%

Add to that I haven't driven a g16 with port injection. It's all moot anyway as neither version of the injection I run will be off a stock computer. I just feel port injection is floored in the sense that you can't get as good a resolution from a single injector compared to 4. Especially now the MS has sequential...

To the original OP you've already identified the main items. Adapter and engine mount pretty much. There are dowels with the adapter but you'll identify them pretty easily once the engine or gearbox is out. The problem is you don't know what the installers did. They may have made other small changes. Rad or rad mounts etc. Theres plenty of ways they could have skinned the cat differently. But they should all be easy fixes. The actual engine changeover shouldn't take more than a weekend. Wiring the ecy and injectir components, adding HP fuel pumps etc is where you'll slow down.

[straty]

ok thanks everyone for the feedback. crewsy are you certain ? i know it was built by suzisport however i would hate to get the head off and find out different ?

[Fatzook]

straty wrote:

ok thanks everyone for the feedback. crewsy are you certain ? i know it was built by suzisport however i would hate to get the head off and find out different ?

Give suzisport a call with the engine number and see what they can tell you,

[losfer]

im with the person who said gti head on the g16 block , no need for flame suit , its proven.

[JrZook]

losfer wrote:

im with the person who said gti head on the g16 block , no need for flame suit , its proven.

Might be wrong but im pretty sure that was proven to be a dog of a conversion.

Paging

mnemonix?

[Ben_Sierra]

losfer wrote:

im with the person who said gti head on the g16 block , no need for flame suit , its proven.

Proven to be a shit solution for an off-road car??

[zookfun]

Pretty much just the adaptor plate and engine mounts to get it back to standard sierra.. Then you'll need to change things like the g13b sump for a sierra sump..

[zookfun]

Also, I reckon the g13b is a great motor for a sierra! They are so much fun to drive and having the power is good for most kinds of 4x4ing.. Maybe not rockcrawling but definitely for sand driving and hillclimbs!

[SuziBlu]

No super revers here.

[zookfun]

Man, those cars are awesome!!

edit- this guy is giving it a bit more!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgoSvNWBPY4&feature=related

[losfer]

Ben_Sierra wrote:

losfer wrote:

im with the person who said gti head on the g16 block , no need for flame suit , its proven.

Proven to be a shit solution for an off-road car??

as you have proven to be a know nothing shit dribbling dickwad ??.

i can provide dyno graphs for any engine in the g series family that show that the g16 twincam produces more torque at a lower rpm than any other engine.

[mnemonix]

dyno graphs mean fuck all for driveability.
None the less, I'm keen to see your proof.

My own experience and that of others I've spoken to is that the engine is a poor choice for a 4wd.
I recently drove a g16/gti in a mk3 swift.
Quite a nice engine in that car.
it threw a leg out of bed about a week after I drove it.

[losfer]

mnemonix wrote:

dyno graphs mean fuck all for driveability.
None the less, I'm keen to see your proof.

My own experience and that of others I've spoken to is that the engine is a poor choice for a 4wd.
I recently drove a g16/gti in a mk3 swift.
Quite a nice engine in that car.
it threw a leg out of bed about a week after I drove it.

well i have built several , and none have"thrown a leg out of bed" as you have put it.
1 i built in 2006 made 128hp, it went for 3 years and never had a breakage , i then turbod the car earlier this year and it now makes 206hp on 18psi of boost , still no breakages , it even ran at the castrol edge jamboree.

the turbo vitara that was posted for sale recently on here by oozuk (he spotted it in a caryard), it was only 1.6 sohc 16 valve engine , but still made 178hp on 12psi of boost , its been running around 2 or 3 years now , its never had a breakage.

also done one in a swift sedan , makes 149hp with a auto on 16psi of boost , does a 14.3 quarter mile , gets thrashed regularly , wow hasnt broken and its been running around for about 2 years now.

how can you say the engine is a poor choice for a 4wd ? its the 1.6 engine (which everyone with a sierra upgrades to right?) just with a different cylinder head on it , cant understand your thinking there bud . i mean sure the 16 valve single overhead cam head has its merits , but the gti head has more possibilities with upgrades , cam gears to make the power/torque in different parts of the rev range , cams are readily available , the sr20 throttle body bolts straight onto the gti intake with a little porting work (which increases low down throttle response).

I mean sure if you get a 1300 gti engine and put it in a sierra they are a bit of a pig , because they dont start making any decent power till 3500 rpm , and peak power at 5600 rpm , which is a bit unusable in a 4x4 , the sr20 throttle body upgrade improves this a lot as throttle response down low is improved and gives a more smoother power delivery , its also relatively cheap as an upgrade. but we arent talking about the 1300 here , we are talking 1600 , it makes its torque at a lower rpm because of its longer stroke , forget about the cylinder head thats attached. ive also heard that the 1600 sohc head flows better than the gti head , well ive never seen the proof , havent seen the gti guys all running out and putting a sohc head on , also lobe centres cannot be dialled in and seperated like on the twin cam head. if you read up about lobe centre seperation , you will find it can dictate to where in the rev range the engine makes its peak torque / power.

so please inform me and the rest of the users on here to why its such a bad idea ?

as and edit : even oozuk , who formerly worked on suzukis also for a few years , and also has a turbo 1600 engine in his sierra , with hang on , NO BREAKAGES , wow , he must be out of his mind !!! why is he using such a poor engine in his zook (sure its not the gti head on his , but it isnt about the head , its about the BOTTOM END)

[sbbunno]

what eva you decide jonny let me know ill come up when your doin it ay

[mnemonix]

Losfer:
Glad to hear you've had some successes mate. You're obvious well versed with the specifics of the G series engine and mechanical works.
I've got no doubts that the engine can make power.
I'm in the process of giving mine some extra berries at the moment.
Reliability with stock fueling/engine management has proven to be an issues. There are some first hand accounts on this forum, myself included.
Redlinegti also has people singing the same song.

If you've had success with the hybrid, thats great.
I'm curious to know what work was done to your 128hp model, including engine management/headwork, plus any work done with the turbo conversion.
The best N/A I have seen to date is ~130hp atw, after extensive port work, sr20tb and bd14's.
The worst I have seen to date produced 68hp atw for a stock g16b / twincam.

If you're running the engine at jambo, it's in a swift no doubt? Have you got any pics, I may know the car?
tjm?

[losfer]

the best N/A you are talking about (1600gti)was run on a bosch dyno at an exhaust shop , it only made 122hp atw on a dyno dynamics dyno.

by the way im n0madic from redline ... been building and racing for a few years now , i decided to go the g13b route and made 205hp on a pretty basic setup.

the 128hp one is tjmgti's , it has a lt8 microtech , some custom cams from waggot , sr20 TB , and vernier timing gears , head and bottom end was stock.

the only other car that makes around the 130 hp mark is bill sherwoods (billzilla) 390kg race car (133hp)

[mnemonix]

Seeing we've threadjacked, might as well continue.

Explains a lot now I know who you are
You're correct about Craigs being on a bosch (questionable) dyno. Still a decent power output, but do you feel that engine would suit a sierra? I personally don't.

I've had my hybrid for a few years now, but didn't do the original conversion.
Can't even crack the 100hp mark, after adaptronic, superfly 200/335 & 210/340 regrinds, sr20, vernier gears extractors etc.
And 3 different tuners and countless dyno hours.

ps: Whack a photo of the g16 you're currently building up here.

[losfer]

you got to remember theres more driveline losses in a 4x4 with gearbox and transfer and diff , and the big tyres , in a fwd theres less driveline losses.

100hp in a sierra is pretty respectable , one thing to look at is how are the cams being dialled in ? on the dyno , or with a degree wheel and dial indicator ? ive seen engines pick up 10 hp just by being dialled in correctly.

[losfer]

i might make a thread for the shit i do , that g16 is a turbo gyrocopter engine , no expense spared ...

[losfer]

also sorry for the thread hijack , but in my opinion theres nothing wrong with a gti or hybrid engine in a sierra . im about to finally drag my sierra out the shed and i am tossing up either to put the 1600 sohc tbi engine i got here in it , or pull the 205hp engine out of the swift and put it in ! imagine pulling up at the lights in a sierra next to say a skyline or clubsport and smoking it !!! but yes i doubt the stock driveline would support the power for long ...